Rgarding the internet neutrality in the forthcomming vote on 23rd January

Ciprian Craciun.
Franz Obermayr, Preslav Borissov, Edvard Kožušník, Zuzana Roithová, Christel Schaldemose, Emilie Turunen, Sirpa Pietikäinen, Mitro Repo, Bernadette Vergnaud, Philippe Juvin, Robert Rochefort, Jorgo Chatzimarkakis, Birgit Collin-Langen, Evelyne Gebhardt, Thomas Händel, Hans-Peter Mayer, Heide Rühle, Andreas Schwab, Barbara Weiler, Phil Prendergast, Gino Trematerra, Sergio Gaetano Cofferati, Lara Comi, Tiziano Motti, Matteo Salvini, Sandra Kalniete, Claudette Abela Baldacchino, Cornelis De Jong, Toine Manders, Adam Bielan, Małgorzata Handzlik, Róża Gräfin von Thun Und Hohenstein, António Fernando Correia De Campos, Eduard-Raul Hellvig, Pablo Arias Echeverría, Vicente Miguel Garcés Ramón, Anna Maria Corazza Bildt, Christian Engström, Malcolm Harbour, Trevor Colman, Catherine Stihler.
Regarding the internet neutrality in the forthcoming vote on 23rd January
  • Dear MEP,
    It came to my attention that on 23rd of January there is going to be a vote on the document `COM/2013/0627 final -- 2013/0309 (COD)` regrading `the European single market for electronic communications and to achieve a Connected Continent`.
    The problem is that as it is written today it undermines the "internet neutrality", allowing telecommunication companies to choose which other company to favor.  This will lead to a weaker market, where monopolies will be easier to build, and harder for smaller firms to enter.
    It is crucial for the European solution builders, which shouldn't be hampered in competing with larger established companies.
    This can be easily fixed by the following:
    * no two-class Internet;  all data should be treaded equality; Article 19 has to be deleted;
    * to prevent harm and additional costs from the open internet our definition of "specialised service" has to exclude all services of the open internet; (Article 2.15)
    * Replace "shall be free" with "have the right" to ensure that the text does not allow discriminatory services. (Article 23.)
    Moreover there are a few other delicate issues:  private companies should not be judge and police; internet censorship for "serious crime" prevention is not the right way. (Article 23.5.a. has to be deleted.)
    Bellow is also the message from AccessNow.org which maybe details better what I've written above.
    Your upcoming vote on the European Commission’s Telecoms Single Market proposal, tabled in September 2013 by the Digital Agenda Commissioner Neelie Kroes, is an opportunity to protect the open and neutral best-effort internet. The Commission's proposal includes provisions undermining network neutrality while permitting discrimination, to the detriment of user rights and the single market. You and your colleagues now have a unique opportunity to protect the internet by creating an environment where free expression, innovation and competition can flourish.
    So far, members of the Committee from across the political divide, under the leadership of its Chair, have risen impressively to the challenge. Members have proposed a favourable definition of "specialised services", closing a dangerous loophole that would enable internet access providers to strangle the competitive open online market.
    We are therefore shocked that the compromise amendment on "specialised services" (CA 11 in the latest version) re-opens and even expands the loophole proposed by the Commission. This amendment is contrary to the majority of amendments tabled on this point, contrary to the interests of internet users and contrary to the needs of the online single market.
    The current definition of "specialised services" is so vague that in practice it could mean any online service. This would create a two-tiered internet, which would obstruct innovation, competition and the exercise of human rights on the internet.
    As you consider this proposal, it is crucial to make sure that internet access providers do not block or discriminate against content, websites, applications, or services; that innovation isn’t stifled; that anti-competitive practices don’t flourish; and that internet users are protected from restrictions of their rights and freedoms. This must be done by not only supporting the non-discrimination principles in Article 23, but by also ensuring a meaningful and workable definition of specialised services.
    This is a critical first step to protect the internet that citizens need and that the economy needs.
    Sincerely, Ciprian Craciun.